Canon EF 8-15mm Fisheye Questions

2 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

Might be worth trying if people happen to have the equipment available.  Just to be clear it focuses in air as well as water behind a dome?

Yes, works fine in air and underwater.

The Sony 1.4X teleconverter has an interflange distance of 15mm (the Kenko is 19mm) and has a front lens element that protrudes 10mm in front of the lens mounting flange, similar to what is found on Canon and Nikon teleconverters.  This protuberance fits nicely inside the Metabones adapter.  This may not be the case for Canon and Nikon teleconverters.  I took my camera, Metabones adapter and Canon 8-15 to the camera shop to test that it all ftted and worked before purchasing the Sony 1.4X.

1 hour ago, Gudge said:

Yes, works fine in air and underwater.

The Sony 1.4X teleconverter has an interflange distance of 15mm (the Kenko is 19mm) and has a front lens element that protrudes 10mm in front of the lens mounting flange, similar to what is found on Canon and Nikon teleconverters.  This protuberance fits nicely inside the Metabones adapter.  This may not be the case for Canon and Nikon teleconverters.  I took my camera, Metabones adapter and Canon 8-15 to the camera shop to test that it all ftted and worked before purchasing the Sony 1.4X.

thanks for the clarification based on how my Canon 1.4x seem to work I would not expect it to have focused, but that was working with longer lenses.  I tried an old Canon MF wideangle lens on an FD-m43 adapter I had along with an Olympus 1.4x and that also reached infinity - so this may be worth trying on other combinations with adapted Canon 8-15 lenses?

15 hours ago, Gudge said:

Yes, works fine in air and underwater.

The Sony 1.4X teleconverter has an interflange distance of 15mm (the Kenko is 19mm) and has a front lens element that protrudes 10mm in front of the lens mounting flange, similar to what is found on Canon and Nikon teleconverters.  This protuberance fits nicely inside the Metabones adapter.  This may not be the case for Canon and Nikon teleconverters.  I took my camera, Metabones adapter and Canon 8-15 to the camera shop to test that it all ftted and worked before purchasing the Sony 1.4X.

If I understand correctly you have mounted the Sony FE 1.4X teleconverter to a Sony full frame camera, then the Metabones/Sigma lens adapter to the teleconverter and then the Canon 8-15 zoom to the lens adapter.

I own the Sony FE 1.4X teleconverter for mirrorless FF cameras and both the Metabones type III I believe and the Sigma EF to FE MC-11  lens adapters. My teleconverter does not fit into either of the lens adapters. I did not attempt to force it in but I am curious how you got it to fit. 

Jaycee:

I can't comment on the functionality of the TC with the 8-15 Canon, or on full frame, but I use theKenko TC with the Nikon 8-15 on APS-C.  I really enjoy the different perspective it gives on some subjects compared to the stock 8-15 and while I have found the TC degrades the image on a Tokina 10-17 more than I like, the images still look good on the 8-15.  I assume the Canon is of similar quality. 

I think, at least in my case, it flattens the perspective a bit which is sometimes nice, to avoid the tadpole effect on fish and other critters.

5 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

I own the Sony FE 1.4X teleconverter for mirrorless FF cameras and both the Metabones type III I believe and the Sigma EF to FE MC-11  lens adapters. My teleconverter does not fit into either of the lens adapters. I did not attempt to force it in but I am curious how you got it to fit. 

I own a later model of the Metabones adapter - Canon EF Lens to Sony E Mount T Smart Adapter (Mark V).  The Sony 1.4X easily fits into it.  It would appear they increased the bore of the Metabones adapter in the latest model.

I am not sure that IQ will improve with the Sony Teleconverter separated a bit from the back of the 8-15mm  lens.

For any one looking to make the move to a teleconverter combination with the Canon  8-15mm lenses that does not already own the Sony 1.4X teleconverter consider the cost. The Metabones V cost $399.00US while the Sigma MC-11 and the KenKo 1.4X teleconverter now cost $414.00US.

Any reason to use Kenko 1.4x teleconverter and not Canon 1.4x teleconverter? Is the quality worse with any of them?

10 hours ago, stillviking said:

Any reason to use Kenko 1.4x teleconverter and not Canon 1.4x teleconverter? Is the quality worse with any of them?

Yes, the Canon 1.4x doesn't fit as far as I know, it has projection with the front elements needing to fit inside the mount of the lens you are using with it, while the Kenko is flat.

The Kenko 1.4 TC has been the go-to TC for a long time - certainly for CFWA use. Folks are generally happy with the image quality.

Don't know if this thread is still alive however I own a Canon 8-15mm since a few years and shot it with my GH5 and metabones smart adapter

Now I am using the same lens with metabones smart adapter V for Sony and Kenko teleplus 1.4x HD Pro DGX which is the new version of the 300 Telepro on a Sony A1.

The canon 8-15mm is an extremely sharp lens for a fisheye I frankly doubt a mirrorless version will be optically better but will definitely be smaller

3 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

Don't know if this thread is still alive however I own a Canon 8-15mm since a few years and shot it with my GH5 and metabones smart adapter

Now I am using the same lens with metabones smart adapter V for Sony and Kenko teleplus 1.4x HD Pro DGX which is the new version of the 300 Telepro on a Sony A1.

The canon 8-15mm is an extremely sharp lens for a fisheye I frankly doubt a mirrorless version will be optically better but will definitely be smaller

I've thought about making the plunge and getting this lens plus the required bits and pieces.

A couple questions:

1) Are you using a Nauticam housing? I think you are.

2) If so, which dome and extension/adapter are you using?

3) Does #2 change when you add the teleconverter (e.g., longer extension)?

Thanks,

- brett

30 minutes ago, TmxDiver said:

I've thought about making the plunge and getting this lens plus the required bits and pieces.

A couple questions:

1) Are you using a Nauticam housing? I think you are.

2) If so, which dome and extension/adapter are you using?

3) Does #2 change when you add the teleconverter (e.g., longer extension)?

Thanks,

- brett

This is all in the port chart, for example the last line in the N85 m43 port chart is for Canon EF lenses with N85-N120 34.7 adapter with 0.71x metabones speedbooster.    You then refer to Canon EF port chart for the ports and extensions.  For m43 it is slightly more complicated as you want to use the metabones smart adapter without the speedbooster optics which is a little thinner and you need to change the extension by this difference.  There is a thread on the 8-15 with m43 cameras on here where Wolfgang details the requirements which include an adapter to allow the Canon EF zoom gear to work with the shorter adapter.

This is the thread :  Canon EF lenses on MFT cameras? - Page 3 - Photography Gear and Technique - Wetpixel :: Underwater Photography Forums

The extension changes when adding the 1.4x there is a line in the EF port chart covers the use of the Kenko with this lens.

Sony similarly has a line item to use a Metabones smart adapter with EF lenses and a specific N100-N120 adapter and referring to the EF port chart.

24 minutes ago, ChrisRoss said:

This is all in the port chart, for example the last line in the N85 m43 port chart is for Canon EF lenses with N85-N120 34.7 adapter with 0.71x metabones speedbooster.    You then refer to Canon EF port chart for the ports and extensions.  For m43 it is slightly more complicated as you want to use the metabones smart adapter without the speedbooster optics which is a little thinner and you need to change the extension by this difference.  There is a thread on the 8-15 with m43 cameras on here where Wolfgang details the requirements which include an adapter to allow the Canon EF zoom gear to work with the shorter adapter.

This is the thread :  Canon EF lenses on MFT cameras? - Page 3 - Photography Gear and Technique - Wetpixel :: Underwater Photography Forums

The extension changes when adding the 1.4x there is a line in the EF port chart covers the use of the Kenko with this lens.

Sony similarly has a line item to use a Metabones smart adapter with EF lenses and a specific N100-N120 adapter and referring to the EF port chart.

Yep, I have the port charts downloaded on my system.

I actually hadn't noticed the part about the extension with the Kenko so thanks for that. The primary reason I was asking about the dome is that:

1) Backscatter lists multiple different dome choices in their "port selector" (which doesn't seem to be working for me right now)

2) Alex seems to have a very large dome for the 8-15 Fisheye in his recent post on the other thread about the Sony a7rV.

Given that people seem to recommend and/or use different size domes with the 8-15 FE, I was curious what he was using.

- brett

5 hours ago, TmxDiver said:

Yep, I have the port charts downloaded on my system.

I actually hadn't noticed the part about the extension with the Kenko so thanks for that. The primary reason I was asking about the dome is that:

1) Backscatter lists multiple different dome choices in their "port selector" (which doesn't seem to be working for me right now)

2) Alex seems to have a very large dome for the 8-15 Fisheye in his recent post on the other thread about the Sony a7rV.

Given that people seem to recommend and/or use different size domes with the 8-15 FE, I was curious what he was using.

- brett

I think the port size is more a function of what you are doing, if you already have a big dome, the 8-15 also works there and has a small quality advantage in the corners perhaps.  But if you look at the Nauticam port chart they say the 140mm dome is most optimised and the smaller domes facilitate you getting in closer.  Then of course the here is the travel issue.  

8 hours ago, TmxDiver said:

I've thought about making the plunge and getting this lens plus the required bits and pieces.
A couple questions:
1) Are you using a Nauticam housing? I think you are.
2) If so, which dome and extension/adapter are you using?
3) Does #2 change when you add the teleconverter (e.g., longer extension)?
Thanks,
- brett

1. Yes
2. 140mm with 30mm extension + N100 to N120 adapter (I have already N120 domes and ports)
3. Add 20mm plus dedicated focus gear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On 11/18/2022 at 8:34 PM, Phil Rudin said:

I now have the KenKo 1.4X Teleconverter in house to try with the Canon 8-15mm full frame fisheye. The images are taken with the Sony A7R IV and are arranged as follows.

#1-8mm without lens hood

#2-At 15mm

With the 1.4X teleconverter you get a zoom through range from 14mm to 21mm cropped. Without the Teleconverter you get 8mm circular and 14 to 15mm without vignette and/or top and bottom crop.

#3-Tele set at 8mm with hood, notice the vignetting and clipping of the image at top and bottom.

#4-Tele with crop 14mm.

#5-Tele with crop 16mm

#6-Tele with crop 21mm 

 

 

#1.: I am just curious, whether you had a chance to test the 1.4x converter on FF UW and what you say about IQ. Does IQ suffer too much (I do not find that IQ suffers when using the Canon 8-15mm with Kenko 1.4x, but this is on the small MFT sensor of Oly EM1II)?

#2.: Can one notice the expected increase in IQ when using the 230mm dome over the 140mm dome, or is the 230mm dome just better for splits (As far as I remember Nauticam marks the 140mm dome with * in their portcharts, indicating that this is, optically, the best solution)?

#3.: Maybe there is a difference in IQ between the Kenko TC and the native (expensive but high quality) Sony-E or Canon-R TCs (it seems the protrusion into the lens does not matter, when one uses the appropriate EF-mount adapter)? It would be interesting in case somebody has tested this...

Wolfgang

13 minutes ago, Architeuthis said:

#1.: I am just curious, whether you had a chance to test the 1.4x converter on FF UW and what you say about IQ. Does IQ suffer too much (I do not find that IQ suffers when using the Canon 8-15mm with Kenko 1.4x, but this is on the small MFT sensor of Oly EM1II)?

#2.: Can one notice the expected increase in IQ when using the 230mm dome over the 140mm dome, or is the 230mm dome just better for splits (As far as I remember Nauticam marks the 140mm dome with * in their portcharts, indicating that this is, optically, the best solution)?

#3.: Maybe there is a difference in IQ between the Kenko TC and the native (expensive but high quality) Sony-E or Canon-R TCs (it seems the protrusion into the lens does not matter, when one uses the appropriate EF-mount adapter)? It would be interesting in case somebody has tested this...

 

Wolfgang

My view

1. All teleconverter deteriorate IQ but 1.4x is much better than APSC crop

2. A bigger dome is always better however it would only make sense if you want to use it for another rectilinear lens as you will need a smaller dome for close up shots

3. I would not use a TC connected to the camera then an adapter then a lens as those adapters sometimes can freeze the camera however it looks like the Sony path works fine

8 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

1. Yes
2. 140mm with 30mm extension + N100 to N120 adapter (I have already N120 domes and ports)
3. Add 20mm plus dedicated focus gear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perfect, thanks.

Everybody thinks rebreathers are expensive -- until they start getting deep into underwater photography. The combination is absurd!

- brett

LOL, a buddy of mine here in Sint Maarten combined u/w photog AND rebreathers.

I could see the reason but, mercy, the amount of gear, the space he needed on the boat - and the care to set up and monitor was incredible.

2 minutes ago, TmxDiver said:

Perfect, thanks.

Everybody thinks rebreathers are expensive -- until they start getting deep into underwater photography. The combination is absurd!

- brett

I already committed 80% to the N120 system even shooting MFT the only native port I still use is the macro so that is something I will need to buy however I am not buying any dome or wet lens / water contact optic. I have also decided that priority is portability not absolute performance which is for sure a compromise solution but my rig for video is already 7 kg and am not plannnig to get to 10kg